Ad

Obama

Feb 162015
 

By Stephen Dinan – The Washington Times – Thursday, February 12, 2015

President Obama’s temporary deportation amnesty will make it easier for illegal immigrants to improperly register and vote in elections, state elections officials testified to Congress on Thursday, saying that the driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers they will be granted create a major voting loophole.

Voting booths soon to be defiled by illegal voters.

Voting booths soon to be defiled by illegal voters.

While stressing that it remains illegal for noncitizens to vote, secretaries of state from Ohio and Kansas said they won’t have the tools to sniff out illegal immigrants who register anyway, ignoring stiff penalties to fill out the registration forms that are easily available at shopping malls, motor vehicle bureaus and in curbside registration drives.

Anyone registering to vote attests that he or she is a citizen, but Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted said mass registration drives often aren’t able to give due attention to that part, and so illegal immigrants will still get through.

John Husted - Ohio Secretary of State

John Husted – Ohio Secretary of State

Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach said even some motor vehicle bureau workers automatically ask customers if they want to register to vote, which some noncitizens in the past have cited as their reason for breaking the law to register.

“It’s a guarantee it will happen,” Mr. Kobach said.

Democrats disputed that it was an issue at all, saying Mr. Obama’s new policy, which could apply to more than 4 million illegal immigrants, doesn’t change anything in state or federal law.

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s nonvoting member of Congress, accused Republicans of an effort at voter suppression.

“The president’s executive order gives immigrants the right to stay — immigrants who have been here for years, immigrants who have been working hard and whose labor we have needed,” Ms. Norton said. “The Republicans may want to go down in history as the party who tried once again 100 years later to nullify the right to vote. Well, I am here to say they shall not succeed.”

obama-usurper

 

Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Democrat, said he doubted illegal immigrants would risk running afoul of the law — which could get them deported — just to be an insignificant part of an election.

The hearing was the latest GOP effort to dent Mr. Obama’s executive action, announced in November, which grants tentative legal status and work permits to as many as 4 million illegal immigrant parents whose children are either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. The president also expanded a 2012 policy for so-called Dreamers, or illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, granting them tentative legal status and work permits as well.

Republicans say there are a host of unintended consequences, including the chances of illegal voting, a perverse incentive created by Obamacare that would make newly legalized workers more attractive to some businesses than American workers and complications with the tax code.

voter-fraud-illegal-aliens-for-obamaThe newly legalized workers can apply for back refunds from the IRS even for years when they didn’t file their taxes, agency Commissioner John Koskinen told Congress on Wednesday.

Mr. Koskinen said the White House never spoke with him about potential consequences before Mr. Obama announced his policy changes. The secretaries of state who testified to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on Thursday said they too never heard from Mr. Obama ahead of time.

Mr. Husted has written the Obama administration asking for help in identifying the name and date of birth of all noncitizens who get Social Security numbers, which he said would allow states to go back and clear illegally registered voters from their rolls.

He said the administration hasn’t responded.

“Why I wrote the letter is I want to comply with federal law,” he said.

Matthew Dunlap, Maine’s secretary of state, said he believed the laws already on the books are good enough to stop any voting mischief in his state, and he doubted illegal immigrants had incentive or intent to try to interfere with U.S. elections.

“My experience is they don’t come here to vote, and they don’t come here to drive. They come here for a better life,” he said.

Mr. Kobach countered with a story about a legal permanent resident who had not yet become a citizen but who registered and voted nonetheless, and who said she wanted to support candidates who would help her earn citizenship faster.

Only four states require proof of citizenship before someone registers to vote, Mr. Kobach said. And even in those states, the federal government offers voter registration cards that don’t require proof of citizenship, giving determined illegal immigrants a way to circumvent checks.

[Watch Obama in the video below lying through his teeth about his true agenda and telling us that he would not do any of the very things he has done and continues to do to this day.]

 

 

via Obama amnesty creates loophole for illegal immigrants to register, vote in elections – Washington Times.

Feb 162015
 

By Bob Price, Breitbart, 15 Feb 2015

EXCLUSIVE: Geert Wilders to Keynote Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Texas

Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders - Champions against Islamization

Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders – Champions against Islamization

Parliamentarian Geert Wilders will deliver the keynote address at the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest being held on May 3rd, in Garland, Texas. The Art Exhibit is being put on by Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI). It will be put on at the same facility in Garland as the Honor the Prophet Conference that was held by a pro-Islamic group in January.

Wilders earned international recognition in the free speech movement when he was brought up on charges for speaking out against Islam at a March, 2014, rally where he promised to reduce the number of Moroccans living in the Netherlands. “The public prosecutor in The Hague is to prosecute Geert Wilders on charges of insulting a group of people based on race and incitement to discrimination and hatred,” prosecutors said in a statement, according to an article by Sam Webb on the DailyMail.

Geller-Art-Exhibit

“Politicians may go far in their statements, that’s part of freedom of expression, but this freedom is limited by the prohibition of discrimination,” prosecutors stated.

Time Magazine called Wilders “The ‘Prophet’ Who Hates Muhammad.”  Winston Ross wrote, ”Wilders may look just as cartoonish as The Donald. But unlike Trump, he’s a legitimate force in politics. For nearly a decade, he’s served as the leader of Holland’s anti-Islamic political party, and he regularly uses his platform to denounce not only violent jihadists but all of Islam.”

Breitbart Texas previously reported the announcement of the art exhibit. Geller’s event comes on the wake of the Islamic terrorist attack on the French magazine Charlie Hebdo in January. Following the attack, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) scheduled the “Stand with the Prophet” conference at the public school district’s conference center. Geller, the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), scheduled a protest outside the event that was attended by approximately 2,000 people.

“Enough is enough,” she explained in a statement obtained by Breitbart Texas. “They’re just cartoons. We’re holding this exhibit and cartoon contest to show how insane the world has become — with people in the free world tiptoeing in terror around supremacist thugs who actually commit murder over cartoons. If we can’t stand up for the freedom of speech, we will lose it — and with it, free society.”

In addition to the art and cartoons featuring The Prophet Muhammad, the exhibit will also have presentations from other free speech advocates.

“Of course, this event will require massive security,” she assured potential attendees. “But this exhibit has to be staged. If we don’t show the jihadis that they will not frighten us into silence, the jihad against freedom will only grow more virulent.”

The art exhibit and contest will culminate with the award of a $10,000 prize for the best artwork or cartoon. Geller also announced on Sunday that there will also be a $2,500 People’s Choice Award. People wanting to submit artwork or cartoons for consideration may do so by sending an email to MuhammasArtExpo@gmail.com.

The Expo will be held at Garland Independent School District’s Curtis Culwell Center on May 3rd, from 5 to 7 p.m. Central Time.

 

via Geert Wilders to Keynote AFDI Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Texas | Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs.

Feb 052015
 

By F. W. Burleigh — February 5, 2015

It is hardly a surprise that immediately after news came out that ISIS had burned a captured Jordanian pilot to death that Barack Hussein Obama absolved Islam of the crime.

Burning alive of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS is nothing else but another practice inspired by Muhammad in the Sunna.

Burning alive of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS is nothing else but another practice inspired by Muhammad in the Sunna.

ISIS released a video on Tuesday of its execution-by-incineration of the pilot, who was captured in December after his plane crashed in ISIS controlled territory.  ISIS had been threatening to execute him if their zealots jailed in Jordan were not released.

CNN immediately reported Obama’s reaction to the news of the horrific slaying: “Should, in fact, that video be authentic,” Obama stated, “it’s just one more indication of the viciousness and barbarity of this organization, and I think it will redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of a global coalition to make sure that they are degraded and ultimately defeated.  And it also just indicates the degree to which whatever ideology they are operating off of, it’s bankrupt.”

Obama’s phraseology is an exercise in denial that Islam had anything to do with it.  By referring to ISIS as “this organization” and using a clunky circumlocution like “whatever ideology they are operating off of,” he has made it clear he believes that Islam has nothing to do with terror.  The cruel burning of the man was the action of a bankrupt “whatever.”

This of course is absurd.  ISIS is Islam 101.  Islam has a 14-century history of using terror to impose itself, starting with Muhammad, the creator of Islam.  Usually it was just matter of cutting throats, lopping off heads, running people through with spears and swords, or shooting them with arrows.  Islam is known as the “religion of the sword,” which was the weapon of choice.  But even this particular mode of killing by fire has precedents in Muhammad’s behavior, his Sunna, and therefore it is allowable to the people of ISIS, who strictly model their behavior on Muhammad’s example.

Christians burned to death in Nigeria by guess who. Why Muslims of course!

Christians burned to death in Nigeria by guess who… Why Muslims of course!

Take for example the Dirar Mosque incident, a mosque in Medina Muhammad denounced as the “mosque of dissidence” and ordered it burned down.  This occurred in A.D. 630 upon his return from the Tabuk raid at the head of 30,000 men who were disgruntled because nothing had been conquered so there was not any plunder to pay them with.  The operation had targeted the Byzantines, but they were nowhere to be found.  It is evident from the literature some of his people attempted to kill him on the return trip, and paranoid that dissatisfaction with him over lack of booty could get out of hand, he ordered the destruction of a recently built mosque as a warning to dissidents. 

This was a mosque that had opened just prior to the march against the Byzantines and had been constructed as an extension of a home belonging to a Christian known as “The Monk,” who had fled to Syria to keep from being killed.  Muhammad deemed it therefore a center of subversion and ordered it torched with occupants inside.  It is recorded that one man burned to death.  One of the zealots who carried out Muhammad’s orders gloated the victim had been burned “down to the scrotum.”

The video below describes the actions of Muslims in Nigeria as they continue to try to cleanse the country of Christians by burning their churches and them as well, if necessary.

 

Another documented burning took place just prior to the Tabuk raid. Muhammad ordered a house to be burned down where people had congregated who objected to joining the raid.  Zealots surrounded the house and torched it.  Most of the occupants escaped, some by jumping from the roof, but the owner, a Jew, was incinerated.

The traditions about Muhammad also contain a number of stories of him threatening to burn the houses down — occupants inside — of people who failed to show up for the obligatory prayers, and he may have actually done so on one occasion.

Islam is all about Muhammad’s Koran and his Sunna, the example of his behavior.  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-declared caliph of the so-called Islamic State, is supposed to have the equivalent of a Ph.D in Islamic literature, meaning that he is well versed in these burning precedents.

An ISIS propaganda video showing this barbaric execution is entitled the “Healing of the Believers’ Chests.”  It is not immediately clear what ISIS meant by this, but it is likely related to Muhammad’s idea of purification through punishment, a concept that is central to Sharia law.  The idea is that if the sinner repents and accepts the punishment that is due in this life under “God’s law,” then Allah will forgive him and spare him the punishment of the fires of hell.  This perhaps explains the apparent calmness of the Jordanian pilot as he walks to the cage on his own and stands with resignation as the flames come toward him.  He had been under ISIS control for more than a month, enough time to convince him that he was an apostate who deserved death, but that he would be spared the flames of eternal punishment through repentance and purification through the death penalty.

His judge-killers calmly watch and feel satisfaction that the fires of this world are sparing this repentant soul from the fires of hell.

truth-about-islamIslam is indeed a bankrupt ideology.  Any ideology is bankrupt that has to rely on terror to impose itself and to ensure against defection.  This execution and other recent ISIS atrocities show the image of Muhammad, repugnant, corrupt, paranoid, grandiose, psychopathic.  It is the image of a man who could preside with gloating satisfaction over the beheading of 900 men and boys and order the assassination of others for refusing to accept him as their prophet.  A man who raided, and plundered, and enslaved . . . and burned people to death.

 

There is no mystery about Obama’s reaction to the ISIS atrocity.  He was raised in a Muslim environment during critical years of his childhod, and his actions of the past six years show he is in alignment with the Muslim agenda.  His pronouncement before the United Nations that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” is nothing if not a statement of his true belief.  He is the typical product of the brainwashing of Islam, which holds that Muhammad was the greatest and most perfect man ever to exist.

If you still have eyes that can open, then open them Obama.  Take a good look into the mirror that ISIS is holding up.  It is holding it up to you and to the entire world.

 

** F. W. Burleigh is the author of It’s All About Muhammad, A Biography of the World’s Most Notorious Prophet.  He blogs at www.itsallaboutmuhammad.com.

 

 via Articles: Obama’s Defense of Islam Burned Along with the Jordanian Pilot.

Feb 052015
 

By Victor Davis Hanson — February 5, 2015

Obama’s comments at the National Prayer Breakfast should help put who he really is in sharper perspective.

Obama-in-Muslim-garb

The real Barack Hussein Obama

President Obama, at the National Prayer Breakfast this morning, said:

Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

This is banal.

The problem with all such high-horse declarations by Obama is his continual omission of historical context and, in this case, his conflation of the frequent with the rare. The Crusades began in 1095, almost a millennium ago; the Inquisition in 1478, now over 500 years past. When the president says “people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” he should remember that all religions at the time committed terrible deeds that shock the modern sense of morality — given the savage wars between Christendom and Islam, and the religious purifications and civil discord common to all the religious factional strife that played out, violently, in accord with the ethos of the times.

Muslim_Hate_political_cartoon2
Slavery was outlawed in the U.S. in 1865. Jim Crow ended officially a half-century ago. Indentured servitude, however, continues, almost exclusively among some Islamic groups in the Middle East and Africa. The caste system and ethnic and religious tribalism that institutionalized discrimination and second-class status, quite akin to Jim Crow, persist in places in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. I doubt today whether a Jew of any nationality would be allowed to immigrate and buy real estate in too many corners of the Islamic Middle East. Outside of the West, women and homosexuals are often treated no differently than in the Seventh Century.
Christianity Vs Islam
In fact, Christian countries were the first to legally end the age-old human sin of the slave trade, and the first to outlaw slavery’s continuance. The president, is fond of historical sloppiness and moral equivalence (cf. the Cairo Speech). But what is the point of
citing sins of 1,000, 500, 150, or 50 years ago, without acknowledging 1) that such pathologies still continue today outside the West, especially in the world of Islam, and 2) that Christianity had a unique role in ending these wrongs?

So the question for the president is, why does such medieval violence persist to a much greater degree among so many Islamic extremists in the present world than among most zealots of other religions? (This is an empirical statement. Cf., for instance, the nature of recent global terror attacks in resources such as the Global Terrorism Database). And why search the distant past for examples of moral equivalence, unless the present does not offer suitable data?

Did Churchill point to the excesses of Oliver Cromwell, or did Daladier to the French Revolution, to remind their contemporaries that National Socialism in Germany was not doing anything differently in the 1930s than had their own countries in the distant past? Those of the 1930s who sought to make such facile comparisons between their own past and Germany’s present were written off as appeasers.


Areas of Central and Latin America are as poor as the Middle East, but Christian liberation theologists, unlike the Islamic State, are not beheading and burning prisoners alive to advance their redistributionist cause. Chinese imperialists and colonialists have absorbed Tibet, but the Dalai Lama is not sending suicide bombers into China. The children of East Prussians expelled from 1945-47 are not suiting up with suicide vests to attack Poles. Impoverished Hindu extremists, angry at centuries of British colonialism, do not hijack planes and ram them into high-rises in British cities. Jews are not blowing up cartoonists and satirists in Paris and Germany who deny or caricature the Holocaust.

No one has easy answers to the dilemma of contemporary violent Islamism; for brief interludes in the recent past, secular ideologies were more likely than radical Islam to be the expressed popular driving forces in the violent Middle East (e.g., fascism [1930s], Communism [1940s], Baathism and Pan-Arabism [1950s], which produced the Grand Mufti, Nasser, the Assads, Arafat, Saddam, and Qaddafi). The president and his advisers should be investigating why radical Islam is currently terrorizing the globe, rather than denying it entirely, hiding it by euphemisms, or excusing it by citing morally equivalent examples from the past.

 

** For the full transcript of Obama’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast you can go here.

 

 

via Still More of President Obama’s Moral Equivalence | National Review Online.

Jan 302015
 

By Adam Kredo — January 30, 2015

Muslim Brotherhood call for ‘long, uncompromising jihad’

Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Egypt.

Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Egypt.

The Muslim Brotherhood called for “a long, uncompromising jihad” in Egypt just days after a delegation of the Islamist group’s key leaders and allies met with the State Department, according to an official statement released this week.

Just days after a delegation that included two top Brotherhood leaders was hosted at the State Department, the organization released an official statement calling on its supporters to “prepare” for jihad, according to an independent translation of the statement first posted on Tuesday.

The statement also was issued just two days before a major terror attack Thursday in Egypt’s lawless Sinai region that killed at least 25.

“It is incumbent upon everyone to be aware that we are in the process of a new phase, where we summon what is latent in our strength, where we recall the meanings of jihad and prepare ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and whoever marched on our path to a long, uncompromising jihad, and during this stage we ask for martyrdom,” it states.

Preparation for jihad is a key theme of the Brotherhood’s latest call for jihad.

An image posted with the statement shows two crossing swords and the word “prepare!” between them. Below the swords it reads, “the voice of truth, strength, and freedom.” According to the statement, “that is the motto of the Dawa of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The statement also invokes the well-known Muslim cleric Imam al-Bana, who founded the Brotherhood and has called for the death of Jews.

Imam al-Bana prepared the jihad brigades that he sent to Palestine to kill the Zionist usurpers and the second [Supreme] Guide Hassan al-Hudaybi reconstructed the ‘secret apparatus’ to bleed the British occupiers,” the statement says.

The Brotherhood’s renewed call for jihad comes at a time when current Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is cracking down on the group and imprisoning many of its supporters, who notoriously engaged in violence following the ouster of Brotherhood-ally Mohamed Morsi.

Egypt experts said the timing of this declaration is an embarrassment for the State Department.

“The fact that the Brotherhood issued its call to jihad two days after its meeting at the State Department will be grist for endless anti-American conspiracy theories about a supposed partnership between Washington and the Brotherhood,” said Eric Trager, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). “The State Department should have foreseen what an embarrassment this would be.”

Hillary Clinton's deep connection to the Muslim Brotherhood through Huma Abedin.

Hillary Clinton’s deep connection to the Muslim Brotherhood through Huma Abedin.

One member of that U.S. delegation, a Brotherhood-aligned judge in Egypt, posed for a picture while at Foggy Bottom in which he held up the Islamic group’s notorious four-finger Rabia symbol, according to his Facebook page.

“Now in the U.S. State Department. Your steadfastness impresses everyone,” reads an Arabic caption posted along with the photo.

Other members of that group included Gamal Heshmat, a leading member of the Brotherhood, and Abdel Mawgoud al-Dardery, a Brotherhood member who served as a parliamentarian from Luxor.

When asked on Tuesday evening to comment on the meeting, a State Department official told the Washington Free Beacon, “We meet with representatives from across the political spectrum in Egypt.”

The official declined to elaborate on who may have been hosted or on any details about the timing and substance of any talks.

The meeting was described by a member of the delegation, Maha Azzam as “fruitful,” according to one person who attended a public event in Washington earlier this week hosted by the group.

The call for jihad, while surprising in light of the Brotherhood’s attempts to appear moderate, is part and parcel of organization’s longstanding beliefs, Trager said.

“Muslim Brothers have been committing violent acts for a very long time,” Trager explained. “Under Morsi, Muslim Brothers tortured protesters outside the presidential palace. After Morsi’s ouster, they have frequently attacked security forces and state property. “

“But until now, the official line from the Brotherhood was to support this implicitly by justifying its causes, without justifying the acts themselves,” he added. “ So the Brotherhood’s open call to jihad doesn’t necessarily mean a tactical shift, but a rhetorical one.”

Terrorism expert and national security reporter Patrick Poole said he was struck by the clarity of the Brotherhood’s call.

The Muslim Brotherhood's violent and supremacist past has strong ties to Hitler's Nazi ideology

The Muslim Brotherhood’s violent and supremacist past has strong ties to Hitler’s Nazi ideology

“It invokes the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorist past, specifically mentioning the ‘special apparatus’ that waged terror in the 1940s and 1950s until the Nasser government cracked down on the group, as well as the troops sent by founder Hassan al-Banna to fight against Israel in 1948,” he said.

“It concludes saying that the Brotherhood has entered a new stage, warns of a long jihad ahead, and to prepare for martyrdom,” Poole said. “Not sure how much more clear they could be.”

Poole wondered if the call for jihad would convince Brotherhood apologists that the group still backs violence.

“What remains to be seen is how this announcement will be received inside the Beltway, where the vast majority of the ‘experts’ have repeatedly said that the Brotherhood had abandoned its terrorist past, which it is now clearly reviving, and had renounced violence,” Poole said. “Will this development be met with contrition, or silence? And what says the State Department who met with these guys this week?”

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment before press time.

[Below are two videos that will give the interested reader further insight into the Islamist agenda and the Obama White House’s connections to the Muslim Brotherhood]

 

 

via Open Jihad Declared in Egypt Following State Dept. Meeting with Muslim Brotherhood-Aligned Leaders | Washington Free Beacon.

Jan 262015
 

By Ian Tuttle — January 26, 2015

A bit of good news in the fight against the Islamic State. Via the Associated Press:

The extremist Islamic State group has nearly been pushed out of the Syrian border town of Kobani, activists and Kurdish officials said Monday, making a major symbolic victory both for the Kurds and the U.S.-led coalition targeting the extremists.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and senior Kurdish official Idriss Nassan said the Islamic State group had been nearly expelled, with some sporadic fighting on the eastern edges of the city near Turkey. . . .

The expulsion of the terrorist outfit from Kobani is a stunning turnaround; by mid October, many had considered the town lost.

However, this victory ought not to be overstated. As the Daily Beast reported earlier this month, the Islamic State has almost doubled the area it controls in Syria over the past four months. The following maps show the approximate gain:

 

 

syria territory - 2015Syria Territory Map

Kobani has not been easily won. According to the AP:

Since mid-September, the battle for Kobani has killed some 1,600 people, including 1,075 Islamic State group members, 459 Kurdish fighters and 32 civilians, the Observatory reported earlier this month. The Islamic State group, increasingly under pressure, has carried out more than 35 suicide attacks in Kobani in recent weeks, activists say.

 

via Report: ISIS Nearly Expelled from Kobani | National Review Online.

Jan 232015
 

by David Harsanyi — Friday Jan 23, 2015

Evidently, Republicans don’t feel competent enough to make a case against infanticide. Why else would the GOP pull its 20-week abortion limit bill?

Pro-Life March on Washington

Pro-Life March on Washington

Here’s a short list of things that are less popular than banning late-term abortions: “Acting” on climate change. “Free” community college. Taxing the wealthy. Building the Keystone XL pipeline. President Barack Obama. Future President Hillary Clinton. Every Republican who’s thinking about running for president.

A new Marist poll finds that 84 percent of Americans favor some level of further restrictions on abortion. And regardless of their feelings about the legality of the procedure, 60 percent believe it to be “morally wrong.” If you aren’t keen on that poll — it was sponsored by the Knights of Columbus, after all — you can take your pick of others.

A Quinnipiac poll found that 60 percent of women support limiting abortions to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy. A CBS News poll found that 60 percent of Americans think abortion “should not be permitted” or available only under “stricter limits.” A CNN poll found that 58 percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal only in a “few circumstances” or “always illegal.”

Yet the GOP caves on a bill that would prohibit most abortions after 20 weeks and promises instead to pass another worthless ban on taxpayer-funded abortions — which we all know can be ignored by hiring an accountant.

Polls change. Polls don’t make you right. I know. But this week marks the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. And while the media continue to treat every Obama non-starter and crowd-pleaser as a genuine policy idea, the 20-week abortion ban was predictably framed as another divisive play by zealous conservatives. Controversial. Republican leaders helpfully confirmed this perception by abandoning the only bill their party has come up with in years that has been widely supported.

Pro-Life March

Pro-Life March

Before the GOP pulled the bill, the Washington Post‘s Dana Milbank had argued that Republicans were needlessly reviving the culture war, pulling a bait-and-switch on the electorate — because abortion is not a high priority for voters and it was “rarely” campaigned on as an issue during the midterms.

Now, I can’t find a corresponding piece from Milbank griping about the left’s obsession with climate change, an issue that is also consistently one of the lowest priorities among voters, but I’m sure it exists somewhere. What’s truly absurd, though, is the idea that the GOP alone is responsible for any “revival of the culture wars.” The culture war never ended. Some of you probably remember the Democrats’ gynecocentric 2014 campaign to paint every GOP candidate as a misogynist.

A big part of that attack was focused on abortion. It stopped working. So someone needs to inform House Republicans of this. Because the most mystifying aspect of the GOP’s retreat on the 20-week ban is that the 20-week ban is not new. Most of these same Republicans voted on the same legislation before the midterm elections, including some of the same representatives who reportedly withdrew their support for the bill. Nearly every GOP candidate running in the midterms publicly backed the idea, even in high-profile races in which Democrats made abortion the central issue of their campaign.

Yet at the same time, Obama continues to support unrestricted abortion on demand for any reason at any time by anyone. There is no one to moderate his position. No one to make him veto a bill. No one to ask him about it. The president has no compunctions about supporting infanticide — which, by any moral or scientific standard, is what we’re talking about.

infanticide

 

It often seems as if the only time the Obama administration opposes government’s coming between a woman and her doctor is when the latter is extracting a dead human being from the former. (Though, to be fair, occasionally those humans are terminated after extraction.) More than 18,000 viable or nearly viable babies do not have a chance to confer with a physician about the excruciating pain they may be experiencing. The House has better things to do than confront that situation.

This is about politics. Tragically incompetent politics. Even though a veto was imminent, you have to wonder: If the party representing the pro-life position, a party with a sizable majority, can’t pull together a vote on an issue as unambiguous and risk-free as this one, what are the chances of it coming to a consensus and offering compelling arguments on issues such as health care and tax reform? Very little, I imagine.

 

via Republicans surrender to infanticide | Human Events.

Jan 192015
 

by Thomas D. Williams, PH.D. — November 7, 2014

 Not all those who claim to be Christians really are, said Pope Francis Friday morning. Some are Christians “in name only,” he said. “They bear the name of Christians but live a life of pagans.”

Pope Francis glaring...

Pope Francis glaring…

In his homily at Mass, the Pope (said) that there have always been two types of Christian, those who truly followed Christ and those who only pretended to. At the time of Saint Paul, there were “worldly Christians, Christians in name only, with two or three Christian features, but nothing more.” The Pope called this sort of people “Pagan Christians,” whom St. Paul called “enemies of the cross of Christ.”

In Paul’s time, the Pope said, the two groups of Christians “were in church together, went to Mass on Sunday, praised the Lord, and were called Christians.” So what was the difference? He asked. The second were “enemies of the cross of Christ.”

The Pope went on to say that “even today there are many! We must be careful not to slip into the way of pagan Christians.” These are the ones, he said, who are “pagans painted over with two brush strokes of Christianity, so they look like Christians, but are really pagans.”

According to Francis, we all run the risk of becoming “Christians in appearance.” We are tempted, he said, to mediocrity, and when Christians become mediocre, “it is their ruin, because the heart cools and they become lukewarm.” Francis reminded his hearers that Jesus used strong language to describe this sort of Christians: “Because you are lukewarm, I will vomit you out of my mouth.” These, the Pope said, “are enemies of the cross of Christ. They take the name of Christian, but do not follow the requirements of the Christian life.”

Pope Francis wants you to “be kind” to lost people, and to not try to convert them to save them from Hell.

Pope Francis wants you to “be kind” to lost people, and to not try to convert them to save them from Hell.  What about the “great commission”?

The Pope suggested that there are questions we can ask ourselves to know what sort of Christians we are. He said that all of us—the Pope included—need to ask ourselves: “How much worldliness is in me? How much paganism?”

Even more specifically, the Pope asked: “Do I like to brag? Do I like money? Do I like my pride, my arrogance? Where are my roots, and where is my citizenship? In heaven or on earth?”

“If you love money and are attached to it, if you love vanity and pride, you are headed down a bad road,” he said. If, instead, he continued, “you try to love God and serve others, if you are gentle, if you are humble, if you are the servant of others, you are on the right path. Your citizenship is in heaven.”

 

via Pope Francis: ‘Pagan’ Christians ‘in Name Only’ are ‘Enemies of the Cross’ – Breitbart.

Jan 172015
 

By Joel Gehrke — January 16, 2015 6:33 PM

Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) urged colleagues not to oppose the House-passed legislation blocking President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, warning that Congress will be “a museum piece” if they do.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

“A vote against the House bill is a vote to turn the Congress into a museum piece,” Sessions said Friday following a congressional retreat in which it become apparent that Republicans are nervous about using the Department of Homeland Security funding as leverage to stop the immigration policies. “A ‘no’ vote is to acquiesce to the greatest erosion of Congress’ lawmaking authority in my lifetime. A ‘no’ vote is a vote to leave our immigration system vulnerable to the most dangerous extremists. A ‘no’ vote is a vote to further erode Americans’ chances of getting a job, raise, or promotion.”

Sessions reminded colleagues that Congress refused to pass laws providing the benefits that Obama is conferring unilaterally on people in the country illegally.

“President Obama’s executive amnesty erases the immigration laws we do have in order to impose on the nation the very immigration measures Congress rejected,” he said.

 

via Sessions: Obama Making Congress ‘A Museum Piece’ | National Review Online.

Jan 172015
 

By ALLAHPUNDIT — January 16, 2015

He starts with 54 votes in the Senate, needing 60 and knowing that centrist Democrats don’t want to cross their own party on a bill that’s only going to end up being vetoed anyway.

Mitch McConnell showing how many of his promises he is going to keep....

Mitch McConnell showing how many of his promises he is going to keep….

Without those Democrats, the only leverage the GOP has is to refuse to fund Homeland Security until Obama agrees to scale back his executive action on immigration — however long that takes. That is to say, the “power of the purse” is really just a euphemism for the power to shut down the government, or part of the government. Senate Republicans have made it crystal clear that they refuse to exercise that power.

In which case, what’s left?

McConnell did not provide a path forward Thursday in the likely case that the House bill fails. Passing the House bill would “be our first choice,” McConnell said. “If we’re not able to do that, then we’ll let you know what’s next.” ( total capitulation)

Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Thune declined to say Thursday whether the upper chamber would pass a clean funding bill for the department if the House legislation stalls in the Senate, but added: “We recognize the important role that the Department of Homeland Security plays in this country.”…

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, outlined the debate ahead of Thursday afternoon’s panel. “None of us want to see DHS face any kind of a shutdown threat. Too important,” he said. “But we also want to make sure we have done all we can to get the president to work with us rather than go around Congress and around the American people through his executive actions.”

If you won’t take Thune’s and Portman’s words for it, just listen to John Cornyn, McConnell’s top deputy in the Senate:

“The expectation by the rank and file in the House is it’s not going to come back even remotely similar to what we sent over there. And there is a real reticence by members of our conference to allow the funding to lapse,” [one House Republican] lawmaker added…

No more drama associated with shutting down, for example, the Department of Homeland Security. That’s off the table,” Cornyn told reporters.

“Under no circumstances will we see any shutdowns,” he said.

 

John-CornynAnd that’s that. Even if the bill passes the Senate, it’s a mortal lock that Obama will veto it. Now here’s the Senate majority whip all but telling you that if that happens, if O forces the GOP to decide between a DHS shutdown and a “clean” bill that funds Homeland Security with no concessions whatsoever on amnesty — a total capitulation by Republicans — they’ll choose the latter.

All of this was entirely foreseeable when the GOP passed the “cromnibus,” setting up a showdown with the White House on DHS funding. McConnell and Cornyn have spent the two months since election day telling every reporter who’ll listen that job one for the new Senate majority is showing Americans it can govern. No more shutdowns, no more debt-ceiling standoffs. Message: It’s safe to elect a Republican president in 2016 and let the GOP control all of government. So what does the House do with the last major bill of the lame-duck session? They set up a shutdown-or-bust choice for the party on amnesty, an issue that’s laser-hot with their own base. Mystifying.

Let me repeat a prediction I made a few weeks ago, then: Precisely because the base is paying close attention, they won’t settle for a “clean” funding bill either. There’s a “security first” bill coming on immigration reform. The only question is when.

Leaders have tried to reassure colleagues worried about illegal immigration by pledging action on legislation to secure the border and strengthen enforcement policies against illegal residents. 

“Step 1 is to pass pretty much all of [Homeland Security Committee Chairman] Mike McCaul’s [R-Texas] border security bill. That’s the first step we’ll take,” said Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-Texas).

McConnell might get 60 votes for a security bill. Centrist Dems like Claire McCaskill fear a backlash from their party

Claire McCaskill - Can you say RINO?

Claire McCaskill – Can you say RINO?

if they humiliate Obama by voting against amnesty, but security at the border and in the interior U.S. is a regular feature of the comprehensive immigration reform bills that Democrats routinely vote for. They won’t be crossing O by supporting it. They will be reducing their party’s leverage over comprehensive reform by supporting only the Republican-favored security half of it, but that matters less after Obama’s amnesty than it used to do.

The legalization half of comprehensive reform has already been enacted: The GOP, by refusing to shut down DHS, will be effectively agreeing to legalization via executive order. That’s not a perfect deal for Democrats — a “security

first” bill will have the force of statutory law whereas O’s legalization order could be undone by the next president — but everyone understands at this point, I think, that no successor from either party is going to undo O’s order. The politics are too tough. So yeah, McConnell might well get 60 for “security first.” The question is, would Obama-Mitch-Mcconnell

Obama sign a bill like that? And if he won’t, knowing that the GOP has essentially forfeited its power of the purse by forfeiting their power to shut down parts of the government, what leverage will they have to force him to sign?

 

via McConnell to conservatives: We’ll do our best to stop Obama’s executive amnesty but don’t expect miracles, okay? « Hot Air.

Jan 132015
 

by Michael Walsh — January 13, 2015

By not sending anyone from the White House to the Paris rallies against Islamic terrorism the other day, President Obama has made his Muslim sympathies abundantly clear.

As I tweeted the other day: now we know which side he’s rooting for. But don’t just take it from me, take it from IBD’s editorial on the subject:

Barack Obama skipped the greatest anti-terror rally ever, the only Western leader to do so. Unlike France’s prime minister, he refused to condemn radical Islam, suggesting disinterest in defeating its spawn. The president and his top aides remain unusually deferential and accommodating to the Muslim community — despite the spike in threats from the Islamic State, al-Qaida and other Muslim terrorists…

Obama’s latest Islamist appointment is hijab-wearing Fatima Noor, who will help usher in more Muslim immigrants as the special assistant for U.S. citizenship and Immigration Services at Homeland Security.

Fatima Noor

Fatima Noor

The IBD continues:

Over the past three years, as Europe deals with Muslim immigrant no-go zones and spiking terror attacks, Obama waved more than 300,000 foreign Muslim nationals into the U.S. — including more than 88,000 from Saudi Arabia alone. Law enforcement can barely handle the terror threats it has without adding unknown foreign Muslims to the matrix.

In his first speech, Obama went to Cairo, invited Muslim Brotherhood leaders to sit front and center, and apologized to the Muslim world for America’s war on terror. Then in 2012, before the United Nations and the world, he declared “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet (Muhammad).”

Remarks such as these, along with his pro-Islamist policies, give a green light for jihadists to go ahead and kill in the name of Islam. Incredibly, our Muslim-sympathizing commander in chief is himself a big part of the terror problem. If America is attacked again, he will have a lot of explaining to do.

Only if the press asks him to explain. Which it won’t.

 

via Obama’s Muslim Sympathies: ‘Curiouser and Curiouser’ | PJ Tatler.

Jan 112015
 

By Logan Albright — January 9th, 2015

The practice known as Civil Asset Forfeiture is getting more attention these days, and deservedly so. Americans need to know that there is a legal mechanism for the government to empty their bank accounts, even if they haven’t been convicted or formally accused – of a crime.

IRS_2

 

The concept of “innocent before proven guilty” has always been a guiding principle in the American legal system. That the burden of proof must be on the accuser rather than the accused is so important that it is specifically included the Constitutions of such diverse nations as Iran, Colombia, Brazil, Canada, Italy, Romania, Russia, and France. Our own Constitution makes it clear in the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments that the government can’t persecute its citizens without first proving that they have committed a crime.

Of course, that prohibition has never stopped the government from doing whatever it wants to do, particularly everyone’s least favorite agency, the IRS. We all justly hate the IRS for walking away with a sizable chunk of our paychecks each month, but most people don’t realize they they have the power to straight up take money out of your bank account if you are suspected – not convicted, not accused, but suspected of criminal activity.

irs-civil-asset-forfeiture-560x313

 

This is not some theoretical or archaic legal loophole that never actually gets used. In fact, it gets used all the time. In 2012, the IRS used this power 639 times, a dramatic increase from the 14 such instances in 2005.

It gets worse. It’s a dangerous world out there, and many of us are justly nervous about terrorist activity. If the IRS is persecuting ruthless criminals,what’s the big deal, right? It turns out, the IRS is doing no such thing. A full 80 percent of the 2012 seizures were not followed up with any criminal proceedings whatsoever. The agency didn’t have a case against these people. In other words, they were innocent, and yet their own government had no problem stealing their hard earned money without so much as notifying them of what was going to happen.

But wait there’s more! Everyone makes mistakes. As long as the IRS gave the money back after they found out no crime had been committed, no harm no foul, right? In many cases, the IRS keeps all of the money it takes, or else only gives back a portion of it.

stealing-robbing

It would be hard to imagine a more clear cut case of outright theft from innocent people than this. If you arouse the suspicions of the feds, they can take your money and refuse to give it back without any further action. Can someone explain how this is any different from a common mugging?

It’s outrageous in the extreme, and yet it’s only one of a number of abuses that emphasize the need for drastic and immediate criminal justice reform. We should not tolerate a government that treats its citizens as a personal piggy-bank.

 

via IRS Drains Bank Accounts of Innocent People | FreedomWorks.

Jan 052015
 

by Raymond Ibrahim — January 5, 2015

Speaking before Al-Azhar and the Awqaf Ministry on New Year’s Day, 2015, and in connection to Prophet Muhammad’s upcoming birthday, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, a vocal supporter for a renewed vision of Islam, made what must be his most forceful and impassioned plea to date on the subject.

Egypt's President Sisi slams Islam and calls for reformation of thought...

Egypt’s President Sisi slams Islamism and calls for reformation of religious thought…

Among other things, Sisi said that the “corpus of [Islamic] texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years” are “antagonizing the entire world”; that it is not “possible that 1.6 billion people [reference to the world’s Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live”; and that Egypt (or the Islamic world in its entirety) “is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.”

 

The relevant excerpt from Sisi’s speech follows (translation by Michele Antaki):

I am referring here to the religious clerics.   We have to think hard about what we are facing—and I have, in fact,addressed this topic a couple of times before.  It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma [Islamic world] to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.  Impossible!

That thinking—I am not saying “religion” but “thinking”—that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world.  It’s antagonizing the entire world!

Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live? Impossible!

391369_Egypt-Sisi

 

I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema—Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now.

All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.

I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move… because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.

Note: It is unclear if in the last instance of umma Sisi is referring to Egypt (“the nation”) or if he is using it in the pan-Islamic sense as he did initially to refer to the entire Islamic world.

 

via Egypt’s Sisi Slams Islamism, Calls for ‘Religious Revolution’ | FrontPage Magazine.

Jan 052015
 

By Sandy Fitzgerald — Monday, 05 Jan 2015

A group of conservatives who tried to unseat House Speaker John Boehner last year is making another try, but this time around, at least two members of the circle say they want to run for the leadership seat themselves.

Reps, Ted Yoho, R-Fla., Louie Gohmert, R-Texas., and House Speaker John Boehner.

Reps, Ted Yoho, R-Fla., Louie Gohmert, R-Texas., and House Speaker John Boehner.

Texas GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert said on Fox & Friends Sunday that he is seeking the gavel, joining Florida Rep. Ted Yoho in a challenge against Boehner.

“We have heard from a lot of Republicans that said ‘I would vote for somebody besides speaker Boehner,’ ” said Gohmert. “But nobody will put their name out there. That changed yesterday with Ted Yoho.”

Yoho, who made his announcement on Saturday, and Gohmert do not have much support for their bids, reports The Daily Beast, but their campaigns could throw a wrench into Boehner’s re-election bid. According to House rules, a speaker is only elected when there is an absolute majority of votes. If that majority does not happen in the first vote, balloting continues until the absolute majority is reached.

There has not been a vote go to a second ballot since 1923, The Daily Beast reports, but given the continued outcry against Boehner, his opponents may be able to force that vote.

Maybe this Wednesday we will all see Boehner sobbing again... One can only hope and pray!!

Maybe this Wednesday we will all see Boehner sobbing again… One can only hope and pray!!

At least 29 Republicans need to vote against Boehner to force a second ballot, and last year, only nine voted against him. So far, just four lawmakers, including Gohmert and Yoho, have publicly said they will oppose Boehner in Tuesday’s vote.

But there may be more, with Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina, who voted against Boehner in 2013, appearing likely to join the opponents’ ranks again, reports The Daily Beast, and newly-elected Alabama Rep. Gary Palmer has said he’s voting against Boehner as well.

Late last month, Jones said that between 16 and 18 lawmakers were talking about voting against Boehner, The Daily Caller reported.

More than a dozen tea party-aligned conservatives are likely to vote against Boehner on the grounds that he is not sufficiently steadfast in opposing President Barack Obama on a variety of issues, including the budget and immigration, The Daily Caller reported.

In addition to Yoho, Gohmert, and Palmer, others purported to be part of the anti-Boehner movement include Reps. Tom Massie, Kentucky; Tim Huelskamp, Kansas; Justin Amash, Michigan; and Steve Pearce, New Mexico.

Boehner, though, is entering Tuesday’s vote from a position of strength. His spokesman, Michael Steel, pointed out that Boehner was “selected as the House Republican Conference’s choice for Speaker in November, and he expects to be elected by the whole House this week.”

In addition, the conference selected Boehner to serve as its official nominee for speaker.

Yoho, meanwhile, told The Tampa Bay Times that this first vote as a representative two years ago was against Boehner, and as a Tea Party politician, says his vote was not a personal attack, “but the representation of the voice of a frustrated nation.”

He said he still believes, two years later, that the American people are ready for new stronger leadership, but still has confidence in the GOP.

“They want a leader who is inspirational in message, and resolute in defiance against this president’s disastrous policies,” said Yoho, who is a large animal veterinarian by trade.

“I didn’t want to go into this Congress with the momentum we have from the November elections without the ability to change leadership in the House,” Yoho said on Fox & Friends Monday. “This is not a surprise. This is something, when I went up there in January of 2013, I voted against Mr. Boehner along with ten other members. And, this has been a build-up since then.”

There is no question that Boehner is in Obama's pocket.  He has demonstrated that time and time again in spite of all his rants to the contrary.

There is no question that Boehner is in Obama’s pocket. He has demonstrated that time and time again in spite of all his rants to the contrary.

But if Boehner wins, Yoho said he’ll stand behind him or whomever is named speaker.

“I’ll go up to him. I’ll thank him, and I’ll tell him, ‘You’re the Speaker for the next two years, and I look forward to working with you to solve America’s problems,’ ” Yoho said.

 

via Reps. Ted Yoho, Louie Gohmert Challenge Boehner for Gavel.

Dec 302014
 

By Caren Besner — December 30, 2014

Webster’s Third International Dictionary defines torture as the infliction of intense pain in order to punish or coerce someone; or to give sadistic pleasure to the torturer. 

 In times past, devices such as the Bastinado, the Rack, and the Iron Maiden were used to extract information or confessions from individuals suspected of everything from witchcraft to heresy.  It is therefore not surprising, under the circumstances, that people would admit anything in order to get the torturers to stop.  Surviving records of people admitting under torture to being in league with Satan, would of course, not be admissible as evidence in any modern court of law; but were seen as valid for hundreds of years from Medieval times through the Inquisition.  Only with the advent of the Enlightenment did civilized societies come to view torture as archaic, obscene, and repugnant.

The Persian Bastinado

The Persian Bastinado

Torture today has an entirely new face, as new techniques have replaced the old.  Instead of the Bastinado, we have the slap in the face.  In lieu of the Rack, we have Waterboarding, and in the place of the Iron Maiden, we have sleep deprivation, hoods over the head and exposure to a cold concrete floor. 

The Rack

The Rack

Torture today has an entirely new face, as new techniques have replaced the old.  Instead of the Bastinado, we have the slap in the face.  In lieu of the Rack, we have Waterboarding, and in the place of the Iron Maiden, we have sleep deprivation, hoods over the head and exposure to a cold concrete floor.

The Iron Maiden

The Iron Maiden

Come to think of it, compared to torturers of old, their modern day CIA equivalents are wussies by comparison; not that anyone would want to experience a Waterboarding session.  It is at best, an extremely unpleasant procedure, albeit one that has been used by our own military in the training of US Navy Seals and other special operation forces.  But does it constitute torture according to the dictionary definition?  That would depend on one’s interpretation of the term “intense pain.”  It is also unlikely that our modern day torturers derived any sadistic pleasure from their actions; although an extreme dislike of the subjects of their enhanced interrogation cannot be ruled out.  They are dealing with individuals such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed; the mastermind of 9-11, the man who beheaded Daniel Pearl and an individual with the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands. 

 

In an ideal world, no sane person would condone the use of torture.  But we do not live in an ideal world.  If tears must be shed for any perceived “victim,” better it be for the families of those who died in terrorist attacks, both before and after September 11, 2001.  On that day, our world changed irrevocably, as an age of innocence suddenly and violently came to an end. The recent release of a report detailing the methods used by the CIA to interrogate captured terrorists serves as both a reminder and a warning of the terrible choices we are forced to make in order to ensure the safety of our population.  The report, based on material supplied by the CIA to a Senate Investigative Committee led by Senator Dianne Feinstein, came to the conclusion that NO useful information was obtained from the use of enhanced interrogation techniques.  That absolutely NO useful information at all was ever obtained is a suspicious statement in and of itself; but the fact that none of the CIA’s three previous directors, the current director, or any of the agents involved in the program was interviewed or put under oath shows a remarkable lapse of judgment and evinces a possible bias toward an already pre-determined conclusion.  The fact that this committee was composed entirely of Democrats also raises questions about the impartiality of the decision and the statement that “no useful information” was obtained contrasts sharply with transcripts of the following interviews: On 12/17/14 Megyn Kelly from Fox’s, “The Kelly File” interviewed Dr James Mitchell, the “Man Who Waterboarded 9/11 Mastermind: If it was torture, I would be in jail.”  This psychologist, who developed the program for the CIA, indicated the techniques were both effective and useful.  Similarly, former Navy SEAL Rob O’Neill, who killed bin Laden, stated on a Fox interview with Peter Doocy that enhanced interrogative techniques used on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yielded positive results.  Previously, we had been told that the raid on bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan was possible only because the name of his courier was divulged during an enhanced interrogation session of a major al-Qaeda terrorist, supposedly Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.  Before we became aware of his function, this courier was just another name in a very long list of suspected terrorists.  After we learned of his role, we had only to follow him until he eventually led us to bin Laden’s lair.  Peter Bergen’s interview on CNN, 12/11/12, where Mr. Bergen gives the names of four al-Qaeda terrorists, all of whom were subject to the same techniques and gave up information.  There are probably instances of other terrorist attacks that have been thwarted using information gathered during these sessions, but security protocol prevents them from being disseminated.   

 

The re-emergence of al-Qaeda, the conquests of ISIS, the resurgence of the Taliban, and the exponential growth of other Islamic terror groups such as Boko Haram, Ansar al-Sharia, al-Shabab, Hamas, and Hezb’allah serves as a warning that we cannot relax our guard for an instant.  We need intelligence from whatever source we can get, and if that means a terrorist has to get slapped or Waterboarded, then that is a better option than the sight of a mushroom cloud over a major American city.  The attacks of 9-11-01 and the murder of 3000 innocents should serve as constant reminders of the nature and intent of the enemy we face and of the failure of the intelligence community to heed the warning signs.  One has only to read accounts of the depredations of ISIS and other terrorist groups from the Middle East to Africa and even on our own home soil to come to the conclusion that we are at war with an implacable foe.  Reports and videos of beheadings, mass executions, crucifixions, abductions, forced slavery, rape, and even being buried alive are commonplace, yet we seem to be more concerned with the perceived ill-treatment of a terrorist than of the aforementioned atrocities.  It has been said that all societies make compromises with their core values during times of distress.  The implication here being, that the threatened society will re-embrace those core values once the crisis has passed.  We can only hope that the compromises we must make during these troubled times do not compromise us as a nation.

 

via Articles: The Bastinado, The Rack, The Iron Maiden, and the Waterboard: Torture in Historical Perspective.

Dec 042014
 

By Thomas Barrabi — December 03 2014 4:38 PM

NYPD Officer Who Killed Eric Garner Was Accused Of Misconduct Before Chokehold Death

A photo of Eric Garner is displayed at a makeshift memorial where he died during an arrest in July, in the borough of Staten Island in New York City Dec. 3, 2014.

A photo of Eric Garner is displayed at a makeshift memorial where he died during an arrest in July, in the borough of Staten Island in New York City Dec. 3, 2014.

New York police officer Daniel Pantaleo expressed remorse Wednesday for the death of Eric Garner, the 43-year-old unarmed black man he killed with a chokehold in July. Pantaleo’s statement was released minutes after a Richmond County grand jury in Staten Island opted not to indict him in connection with Garner’s death.

“I became a police officer to help people and to protect those who can’t protect themselves. It is never my intention to harm anyone and I feel very bad about the death of Mr. Garner. My family and I include him and his family in our prayers and I hope that they will accept my personal condolences for their loss,” Pantaleo said in a statement, according to NBC New York’s Steven Bognar.

Garner died July 17 after an altercation with a group of NYPD officers attempting to arrest him for allegedly selling cigarettes illegally. Pantaleo restrained Garner with a chokehold, a maneuver that the NYPD banned in 1993. Garner, who suffered from asthma, lost consciousness at the scene and suffered a heart attack en route to a hospital. A New York City medical examiner ruled Garner’s death a homicide by “compression of the neck.”

A Staten Island grand jury considered several possible criminal charges against Pantaleo, including criminally negligent homicide and manslaughter. “Oh my God, are you serious? Garner’s widow, Esaw Garner, told the New York Daily News after the decision. “I’m very disappointed. You can see in the video that [Pantaleo] was dead wrong.”

article-pantaleo-3-0802

NYC Police officer Daniel Pantaleo – Criminal with a badge!

Pantaleo was an eight-year NYPD veteran at the time of the incident, the Associated Press reported. The NYPD stripped him of his badge and gun on July 19 and relegated him to desk duty.

New York police union president Patrick Lynch defended Pantaleo in August and said that the officer was “very distraught” over Garner’s death. “No one wants to have to deal with the fact that someone died because of something they had to do. It’s a terrible loss,” Lynch said.

Pantaleo was sued twice in the past for alleged racially motivated misconduct while on the job. Two black men accused him in 2012 of subjecting them to an illegal strip search in broad daylight. Pantaleo purportedly “tapped” each man’s testicles during the search, which he claimed was a bid to discover any contraband, the Daily News reported. The suit was settled last January.

In a second lawsuit, a man named Rylawn Walker accused a group of NYPD officers that included Pantaleo of arresting him despite the fact that he was “committing no crime at the time and was not acting in a suspicious manner” and of including misleading data on a police report to justify the arrest, theStaten Island Advance reported. Charges against the man were ultimately dismissed.

 

via Who Is Daniel Pantaleo? NYPD Officer Who Killed Eric Garner Was Accused Of Misconduct Before Chokehold Death.

Nov 222014
 

By M. Catharine Evans — November 22, 2014

I don’t know if Bill Cosby drugged and raped women over the past four decades. 

No one in the media knows, either – not the ladies on The View, not MSNBC, not the Washington Post, and certainly Cliff Huxtablenot black feminists calling for his head.  CNN’s Don Lemon doesn’t know, either.  In a second interview with one of Cosby’s accusers, Lemon acted like a prosecutor when it came to her claims of forced oral sex, even going so far as to ask why she didn’t “bite” Cosby.

So far, the only alleged victim to file charges was paid off in 2006. Up until now, Cosby, along with his Cliff Huxtable character,  has survived the occasional news reports of alleged assaults.  As late as 2012, Saturday Night Live felt comfortable enough with Cosby’s public image to parody his top-rated 1980s sitcom, The Cosby Show,  with their own version called The Obama Show.

Try comparing Barack Obama to Cliff Huxtable today.  Due to the severity of the recently surfaced accusations, Netflix and NBC have already canceled upcoming specials, and the actor’s lawyers are in damage control mode.  TV Land is pulling reruns of his long-running sitcom.

Cosby is finished.  The star’s guilt or innocence will eventually work itself out, or not.  But a peripheral question emerges from the barrage of coverage this story has received: why has the mainstream media suddenly come down on the 77-year-old former TV star like a proverbial ton of bricks when allegations of sexual assault have been swirling around Cosby for decades?

Cosby’s latest troubles started when a Chicago-born comic, Hannibal Buress, skewered the septuagenarian at Philadelphia’s Trocadero Theatre on October 16.  Until then, the newest rape accusations weren’t  getting much play in the media.  At the time,  Buress was riding high after a September gig at the Verizon Center in D.C. and a write-up in the Washington Post.  His Philadelphia act, which included the lines below, ignited the firestorm now engulfing Cosby, and it didn’t take long for his attack on Cosby to hit the mainstream.

 

From Philly Magazine:

… And it’s even worse because Bill Cosby has the [f******] smuggest old black man public persona that I hate, “Pull your pants up black people. I was on TV in the 80’s. I can talk down to you because I have had a successful sitcom. Yeah, but you raped women Bill Cosby, so brings you down a couple of notches[.]

The comic wasn’t the only voice out there calling Cosby a rapist and dissing his sitcom.  Brittney Cooper, a black feminist academic and co-founder of the Crunk Feminist Collective blog, came out with her own take on the Cosby mess.  Nothing enrages a feminist like the sight of a functional nuclear family, and Cooper is no exception.  Her October 24 article on CFM entitled “Clair Huxtable is Dead: On Slaying the Cosbys…” appeared a week after Buress’s stand-up.  Cooper seized on the alleged victims’ cries of rape to air her personal views onThe Cosby Show – namely, that black folks like the Huxtables promote white privilege.  For Cooper, the traditional nuclear, upwardly mobile family is a racist, oppressive social construct that “never was.”

 

From “Clair Huxtable is Dead”:

Now that a Black male comedian Hannibal Burress [sic] has had the courage to take Cosby to task for his conservative, anti-poor, misogynistic respectability rants, people are listening again. …

And since Bill Cosby is a rapist, his avatar Cliff Huxtable is a representational terrorist, holding us hostage to a Black family that never was. But let him die. …

[I]t has long been time to slay the Huxtable patriarch. So Cliff Huxtable, you’re dead to me! …

[E]verybody should be clear that Clair Huxtable is dead, too.

The Cosby Show, which premiered in 1984 during the Reagan era, birthed a new paradigm in television.  For the first time, an upper middle-class black family unit was seen in a positive light.  Its predecessors , shows like Good Times, Sanford and Son, and The Jeffersons, depicted angry, boisterous black fathers, some using the N-word and calling white people “honkies.”

Huxtable Family

The Huxtable family of the Bill Cosby Show — What should be the Black American dream family.

By contrast, the highly rated Cosby Show rarely dealt with race issues or the contemporary black experience.  Bill Cosby’s character, a successful physician and caring father, raised the bar and created a foundational narrative built on what black families could be – especially if they didn’t spend all their time railing against “whitey.”  After 20 years of failed multi-billion-dollar government welfare programs and social justice scammers like the Children’s Defense Fund, Americans of all colors embraced the Huxtables.  The show’s popularity and stellar ratings suggested that the American Dream was not dead – only dormant.

Bill Cosby; Phylicia RashadThe Dream for many  began in the 1950s with the rise of the middle class.  By the mid-1960s, more and more blacks were moving away from poverty and into the middle class.  But this upward mobility began to seriously stall with Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty.  As the welfare rolls rose, so did the number of single-parent black families led by females.  Race-baiters, activists, socialists, and Ivy League scholars were out in force and quick to deride anyone for daring to criticize single mothers in the black community.  The first female president of Howard University said, “One must question the validity of the white middle class lifestyle from its very foundation because it has already proven itself to be decadent and unworthy of emulation.”  Feminists loved this kind of talk since they, like Cooper, saw the nuclear family as economically oppressive and husbands/fathers as the oppressors.  In her writings, the Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison glorified the suffering single black mother as superior to a married white mother bound to one man in an unequal relationship.

By the 1980s, Americans, including blacks feeling the effects of generational welfare, were opening their eyes to the devastation caused by ivory tower-dwellers far removed from the inner-city ghettoes.  No wonder The Cosby Showwas such a big hit.  Its popularity reflected what  the majority of Americans  needed and still need – a mother and father working together to provide a better life for their children.  In 1989, while Barack Obama was listening to Reverend Jeremiah Wright degrade middle-class values, The Cosby Show was number onein the ratings.

Now, twenty years later, 85% of all black children in poverty live in single-mother households, there’s  skyrocketing  black-on-black crime, and Americans across the nation are waking up to the realization that  their tax dollars have been subsidizing dependency and degeneracy for fifty years.  It’s the ’80s all over again.  Progressives are feeling the rumblings of mass discontent.  The Huxtables must be destroyed.  It’s too risky.  Ferguson is looming.  Black kids with no fathers and no moral compass can’t have a mythical figure like Dr. Huxtable appearing in their living rooms every night, getting their hopes up.

 

via Articles: Bill Cosby: Why Now?.

Nov 192014
 

by Michelle Malkin — Nov 19, 2014

President Obama is poised to show his “compassion” this week by granting work cards to an estimated five million illegal immigrants through an imperial executive order.

obama-immigration

 

As for the vast, untold number of law-abiding citizens whose identities have been stolen by foreign law-breakers, two words: Tough luck.

Social Security card fraudsters have made out like bandits thanks to the White House. Their victims are about to get kicked in the teeth again.

Two years ago, when Obama launched his first administrative amnesty known as “DACA” (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), the White House gave aid and comfort to illegal alien applicants who were concerned that their previous felony identity theft and fraud crimes would preclude them from the new non-deportation benefits. The Department of Homeland (In)security made clear that illegal workers who wanted coveted employment documents would not have to disclose to the feds whether they used stolen Social Security numbers.

See Obama’s facebook invitation to watch the immigration anonouncement….

Center for Immigration Studies analyst Jon Feere reported at the time that ethnic lobbyists and open-borders businesses lobbied the Obama administration hard “to keep American victims of ID theft in the dark while shielding unscrupulous businesses from enforcement.” As an Obama official told The New York Times, DHS employees are “not interested in using this as a way to identify one-off cases where some individual may have violated some federal law in an employment relationship.”

Translation: See no identity theft. Hear no identity theft. Speak no identity theft.

A high-profile immigration attorney crowed: “Good news for deferred action applicants: If you used a false Social Security card, you need not reveal the number on your deferred action application forms. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has clarified that when the forms ask for an applicant’s Social Security number, it refers to Social Security numbers issued to the applicant. If you used a friend’s number, a made-up number or a stolen number, you should answer N/A for ‘not applicable’ where it asks for the number.”

ID-THEFT

Since then, more than 500,000 DACA applications have been approved with abysmal oversight, little public disclosure and total absolution for identity rip-off artists. The latest planned administrative amnesty will dwarf that ongoing fiasco.

Victimless crimes? Tell that to those who have been harmed by the estimated 75 percent of working-age illegal aliens who have fraudulently used Social Security cards to obtain employment. Tell it to victims in border states with the highest percentages of illegal aliens, where job-related identity theft is rampant.

 

via A White House Mass Pardon for Identity Thieves – Michelle Malkin – Page 1.

Nov 072014
 

By Lloyd Marcus — November 7, 2014

My lovely wife and I shared a victory toast and a kiss in front of the fireplace in the lobby of the hotel where we are staying in

Colorado, upon the announcement that the GOP won the Senate.  

Lloyd Marcus -Tea Party - American Patriot!

Lloyd Marcus -Tea Party – American Patriot!

Our Conservative Campaign Committee team has been here for weeks, working to elect Cory Gardner for U.S. Senate.  Gardner won!

Folks, please do not get me wrong: I am elated that the GOP has won control of the Senate.  Despite its faults, the GOP is closest to our principles and values.  Also, we desperately needed to dethrone evil madman Harry Reid as Senate majority leader.

However, I must confess that it was annoying to watch Karl Rove on TV pounding his chest in victory, proclaiming how he and his group pushed the Tea Party nut candidates out of the race.  Rove had the nerve to say he and his people wanted the best electable conservative candidates.  That simply is not true.

Chris McDaniel, to name one, in Mississippi was an awesome, extremely electable Tea Party conservative who was pushed out of the race with GOP dirty tricks, including race-baiting.  Yes, you heard me correctly.  The GOP establishment machine engaged in the Democrat-gutter, tried-and-true, despicable tactic of race-baiting to screw McDaniel.

I know.  I know.  You’re saying, C’mon, Lloyd, that’s in the past.  We won.  Celebrate and get over it. Sorry, folks.  I expect better from our side.

Rove and his deep-pocketed homeys’ strategy of the GOP keeping a low profile and letting Obama hang himself worked okay.  Unfortunately, exit polling revealed that the GOP is still viewed unfavorably by a majority of voters.  Given the horrors and scandals of the Obama regime, the Republican wave should have been a tsunami.  What if the GOP had offered an agenda inspiring people to vote for them rather than against Obama?  What if the GOP boldly articulated why conservatism is the best and most direct path for each and every American to achieve his or her American dream?

Two remarkable things happened this election that strongly suggest that blacks are open to hearing what conservatism has to offer over liberalism.  A video of urban blacks in Chicago trashing Obama and the Democrats went viral.  And my lifelong Democrat 86-year-old black dad called from Maryland to tell me that he did not like any of the candidates, but he voted Republican.  Folks, that is huge.  Dad has always believed that a vote for a Republican is a vote for the KKK.  So something is up.

Republicans now control the House and the Senate.  Praise God!  Now what?  Word on the political street is that the GOP plans to give the Tea Party the finger.

Patriots, we must be more mobilized and engaged than ever.  We must do everything in our power to push the GOP into doing what we worked our butts off for them to do: stop Obama’s agenda!

D.C. insiders say that the GOP strategy is not to push back too soon or too hard against Obama’s agenda, so as not to be called arrogant, aggressive, and mean by the MSM.  The game plan is to play nice with Obama so as not to hinder our chances of winning the White House in 2016.

Karl Rove, GOP establishment hack and voice against the Tea Party

Karl Rove, GOP establishment hack and voice against the Tea Party

These D.C. insiders also say that repealing Obamacare is impossible and that the best that we in the Tea Party can hope for is for the GOP to fix it.  Mitt Romney said that upon the GOP winning the Senate, an immigration bill would be top priority.  You see where this is headed, folks?  The GOP plans to go squishy on us and implement a Democrat-lite agenda.

We cannot and will not allow them to get away with it.  I am proposing that the united forces of the Tea Party launch “Operation Hold Their Feet to the Fire.”  Every individual, group, and organization must use their gifts, talents, skills, and passion to force the GOP to do the right thing.

Folks, we have brilliant minds on our side.  I have met many of you traveling on over a dozen national bus tours, attending over 400 Tea Party rallies.  I challenge you to think of strategic ways to turn the GOP’s agenda to our agenda: repeal Obamacare, secure our borders, return to fiscal responsibility, restore our freedom and liberty, and turn us back to one nation under God.

Ronald Reagan: “There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.”   Patriots, I am calling reagan nation under god or gone underfor an-all-hands-on-deck drill to save our country by holding the Republicans’ feet to the fire.  Frankly, I do not care which Tea Party group, organization, or individual leads the charge.  Let’s just get it done!

Everyone pulling together is how we (conservatives) won big in 2010, shocking Washington, D.C., despite being ignored by the MSM.

As I said, we are in Colorado, too busy campaigning to enjoy the world-renowned hot springs.  In celebration of the Republican wave, America’s push-back against socialism, we can relax a bit.  Mary and I plan to enjoy a few relaxing therapeutic soaks in the sulfur-smelling hot springs.

Then we will be ready to pack our bags and hit the road on a “Hold Their Feet to the Fire Tour.”  I have even written a soon to be released theme song.

I thank God for our victory.  But there is still much more work to be done – miles to go before we sleep.

Congrats, patriots: taking the U.S. Senate is a major step in the right direction.  Now, I don’t know why, but I feel compelled to end with this video of Kate Smith singing “God Bless America.” 

 

via Articles: We Won: Now We Must Hold Their Feet to the Fire.

Nov 042014
 

by Paul Joseph Watson — November 4, 2014

Rep. Scott Rigell calls for paper ballots amidst numerous reports of irregularities in Virginia’s 2nd District

Video footage out of Virginia’s 2nd District shows a voter being forced to choose Democrat Suzanne Patrick over Republican Scott Rigell as an electronic voting machine refuses to accept his selection of the GOP candidate.

 

voter-fraud

They’ll do anything to save the gravy train!

Ted Sibiga tried over 20 times to vote for Rigell but every time his vote was flipped to count in favor of his Democratic opponent.

“I asked for help and the election officials showed me how to correct it, but did NOT shut down the station. He said it was a calibration issue,” Sibiga wrote in the description to his video, contradicting Virginia Beach General Registrar Donna Patterson who said that every faulty machine was immediately removed.

A separate video (see below) from another Virginia Beach resident shows exactly the same phenomenon.

 

Rep. Rigell addressed the issue during a press conference earlier today, stating, “We know it’s going to grow through the day. That is not an anomaly, that’s a pattern, in each and every case it’s going against us and in favor of our challenger.”

Given the fact that the 2nd District is set to be one of the closest outcomes of the Virginia congressional race, it’s unsurprising that Rigell is drawing attention to the problem.

The Congressman even took to Twitter to warn voters to verify their selection before casting their ballot.

Rigell-Twitter

According to Rigell’s campaign, no less than 37 different locations have reported similar problems with electronic voting machines today.

“Rigell and the state GOP are calling on the Virginia Beach Supervisor of Elections to switch to paper ballots at the precincts where problems have been reported,” reports ABC 13.

As we reported earlier, electronic voting machines have been plagued by similar problems across the country, with the vote being flipped in most cases from Republican to Democrat.

Watch an ABC 13 report about the voting irregularities below.

 

via » Video: Touch Screen Forces Voter to Choose Democrat Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!.